Prevalência da Síndrome de Burnout em Professores: Protocolo de Revisão Sistemática

Natháchila Corrêa Lima Chamy; Thiago dos Santos Maciel; Bruno Mori; Marcelo dos Santos Maciel; David Lopes Neto

doi:10.36489/saudecoletiva.2025v15i94p15201-15210

Authors

Natháchila Corrêa Lima Chamy Universidade Federal do Amazonas (UFAM) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0287-5391
Thiago dos Santos Maciel Universidade Federal do Amazonas (UFAM) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4291-7015
Bruno Mori Universidade Federal do Amazonas (UFAM) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0903-2132
Marcelo dos Santos Maciel Secretária de Educação do Estado do Rio de Janeiro https://orcid.org/0009-0009-6698-6152
David Lopes Neto Universidade Federal do Amazonas (UFAM) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0677-0853

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.36489/saudecoletiva.2025v15i94p15201-15210

Keywords:

Burnout, Psychological, Faculty, Prevalence

Abstract

Objective: This systematic review protocol aims to analyze the prevalence of Burnout Syndrome among teachers. Method: Registered in PROSPERO (CRD420250651910) and following PRISMA guidelines, it will include observational studies (cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control) that use validated instruments. The search will be conducted in the MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, LILACS (BVS), PsycInfo, and Google Scholar databases. The selection and extraction of data will be carried out by two independent reviewers, with a third to resolve any discrepancies. The risk of bias will be assessed using the ROBINS-E and JBI tools. The data synthesis will include meta-analysis with random effects models and evaluation of the quality of evidence using the GRADE system. Conclusion: This review will provide a comprehensive overview of the prevalence of burnout among teachers, identifying associated factors and contributing to new perspectives on the topic.

References

Ministério da Saúde. Síndrome de Burnout. Disponível em: https://www.gov.br/saude/ptbr/assuntos/saude-de-a-a-z/s/sindrome-de-burnout Brasil, 2019.

Maslach C, Schaufeli WB, Leiter MP. Job burnout. Annual Review Psychology. 2001;52:397-422.

Massa LD, Oliveira E, Dell'Aglio DD, Tavares JP. Síndrome de Burnout em professores universitários. Rev Ter Ocup Univ São Paulo. 2016;27(2):180-189.

Gil-Monte PR. El síndrome de quemarse por el trabajo (burnout) como fenómeno transcultural. Informació Psicológica. 2008;91-92:4-11.

Dias BV, Silva PSS. Síndrome de Burnout em docentes: revisão integrativa sobre as causas. CuidArte, Enferm. 2020;14:95-100.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.

Maslach, C., et al. (2016). Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual (4th ed.). Consulting Psychologists Press.

Kristensen, T. S., et al. (2005). The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress, 19(3), 192-207.

Demerouti, E., et al. (2003). The Oldenburg Burnout Inventory: A good alternative to measure burnout. Work & Stress, 17(3), 213-219.

Tamayo, R. M., & Tróccoli, B. T. (2009). Exaustão emocional, despersonalização e realização profissional em professores: Validação da Escala de Caracterização do Burnout (ECB). Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 22(3), 394-402.

Schaufeli, W. B., De Witte, H., & Desart, S. (2020). Burnout Assessment Tool (BAT) - Development, Validity, and Reliability. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(24), 9495.

Sterne, J. A., et al. (2019). ROBINS-I: A tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomized studies of interventions. BMJ, 355, i4919.

Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, Campell J, Hopp L. Chapter 3: Systematic reviews of effectiveness. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z, editors. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis [internet]. JBI; 2020 [cited 2023 Oct 6]. Available from: https://synthesismanual.jbi.global.

Ma LL, Wang YY, Yang ZH, Huang D, Weng H, Zeng XT. Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better? Military Med Res. 2020;7(7).

Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Stephenson M, Aromataris E. Fixed or random effects meta-analysis? Common methodological issues in systematic reviews of effectiveness. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(3):196-207.

Schünemann, H. J., et al. (2020). GRADE handbook for grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. Cochrane